Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

1 / 1 ; the window can also vibrate because bass frequencies carry more in solids than in air. indeed in both cases it is resonance. I suggest that the whole panel of the window is large enough to react to some low frequencies.

some kind of tuning of the windows occur there. ..

in the pian the bridge vibrates at different rates, the neighbour strings only react when the rate is enough for them. then it sound its fundamental frequency, only exited by the bump of the hammer. If you put a finger on the bridge you can feel the vibrations. the neighbour strings filter and tunes the vibrations of the bridge...hence my point a global better soundong of pianos :with high level of consonancewith springy pins and lively upper segments.

_________________________
It is critical that you call your Senators and Representatives and ask them to cosponsor S. 2587 and H.R. 5052. Getting your legislators to cosponsor these bills

I still wonder, why a person would do this to a piano or anything else in the first place? Again, what purpose does it serve?

If some pianos have this effect then there may be implications for the sonority of the piano when using the sustain pedal. I would imagine increased cacophony if many adjacent un-dampened notes are more easily excited at their fundamental.

Holding down a note intentionally making it not play, and then seeing how many surrounding notes you can get to sound through it, or how many you cannot make sound, and then complaing about it, wondering if that is normal, is ridiculous. It is not normal to do that to begin with.

That, in and of itself, serves no useful purpose for the playing of the instrument. That was my point. What pianist plays the piano that way anyway? None that I know of.

Stravinsky's Serenade en La uses silently depressed notes to hold certain sounds, as do a number of pieces by other composers. The most notable piece is Ives' Concord Sonata, which calls for a block of wood to hold a cluster of notes. Even Paganini from Carnival by Schumann plays a bunch of loud chords with the pedal, and then plays another chord almost silently, which is held while the pedal is let up. The latter chord is heard without attack.

My credentials in the field are not relative to the general discussions at Piano World. I clearly state my name and location in my signature line.

If you must know, I hold a Master of Science in Acoustical Engineering from Loyola University. I need not defend my statements to you. Your window analogy is flawed for the reasons I have noted. My credentials are not derived by means of Google.

This is a discussion group. My curriculum vitae is not prerequsite to my participation in this forum. My musical credentials also are not necessary for participation in these forums. Those credentials are the intellectual and practical basis for my skill as a performing pianist and do not require posting on a billboard.

When you venture into analogy based on flawed scientific deduction, your misconception should be presented to the forum. I did just that.

This topic has become an argument about diction, the choice of words, rather than a discussion of the physics of piano sound.

Don't they all, eventually? This one just happened sooner than most. Hitler. I will say, though, I am so glad for your most recent post, BDB, regarding the holding down of keys, silently, in a musical context per composition per recognized great composers.

1 / 1 ; the window can also vibrate because bass frequencies carry more in solids than in air. indeed in both cases it is resonance. I suggest that the whole panel of the window is large enough to react to some low frequencies. [...]

I suggest the window needs to be re-glazed with Fletcher Terry Glazier Push Points, which distribute weight better than traditional 08-111 Diamond [shaped] Fletcher Terry Glazier Point for Professional Driver No. 1. These particular push points should be used wherever windows are glazed on truck routes, imho. Then, we can get back to talking about why adjacent strings vibrate. (BTW, DAP latex window-glazing-in-a-tube glazing compound is not the same as DAP '33' glazing compound in a tub. Very, very different compounds with very different properties. Wholly different, in fact..., although they both hold the window in, ultimately...)*

Upon further testing on the Lester, I noticed that B2 and C#3 made silently held C4 ring. I also noticed that B4 and C#5 made an upper partial of silently held C4 ring. Someone please learn me. Or, at least, school me. Or, at the very least, teach me.

Thank you, Jer, for leRnin' me where B0 starts.

And, I do mean leRnin'.

_____* Did I just split an infinitive??!? Or, what? (ala Edie Arlisa Brickell)

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19946
Loc: New York City

Originally Posted By: BDB

Stravinsky's Serenade en La uses silently depressed notes to hold certain sounds, as do a number of pieces by other composers. The most notable piece is Ives' Concord Sonata, which calls for a block of wood to hold a cluster of notes. Even Paganini from Carnival by Schumann plays a bunch of loud chords with the pedal, and then plays another chord almost silently, which is held while the pedal is let up. The latter chord is heard without attack.

Which means that what Jerry said is true only 99.9999999999999999999999999% of the time.

Some people (idiots in my opinion) also compose music to be played in chords in the lowest octaves of the piano. That makes the piano sound horrible tuning wise, to me and to most reputatble technicians. We get the nost complants from people playing the piano in the manner. Does that mean the piano should be played that way then? Just because someone wrote something for it or, thought of it? Or, thinks it sounds good?? Noooooo but, they do it anyway... Hey, I know, I might as well use my iPAD for a cutting board! There's an idea! Whatever blows your hair back.... Once again, I say, what useful purpose does the OP have for doing what he is doing? I repeat. No useful purpose.

By the way, I lost my glasses recently today, as a matter of fact, so I can barely see what I am typing let along what you said so if there are more than usual, mistakes, da'ts what fer how come! I blind bat now...

[...] Does that mean the piano should be played that way then? Just because someone wrote something for it or, thought of it? Or, thinks it sounds good?? [...]

What if...

Somebody composed something because their tuner tuned their piano a certain way, and it sounded good because of the way the composer composed it because of the way the tuner tuned it?!? Tonal Temperament (TT), anyone? Anyone????

There is a sonata for a 5 + 7 tuned piano in one of Owen Jorgensen's book. The piano is tuned with the 5 black keys equal tempered and the 7 white keys equal tempered, as opposed to the 12 chromatic keys being equal tempered. Then there is Harry Partch's music, using a 69 note per octave just intonation, not for piano, but he did tune some harmoniums that way. There are also a number of pieces for quarter tones, sometimes with pianos especially made, sometimes with two pianos.

All of these are probably less successful than the various ways of using resonances within a piano. After all, that has always been available, and the most important pedal on the piano, the damper pedal, relies on them.

There is a sonata for a 5 + 7 tuned piano in one of Owen Jorgensen's book. The piano is tuned with the 5 black keys equal tempered and the 7 white keys equal tempered, as opposed to the 12 chromatic keys being equal tempered. Then there is Harry Partch's music, using a 69 note per octave just intonation, not for piano, but he did tune some harmoniums that way. There are also a number of pieces for quarter tones, sometimes with pianos especially made, sometimes with two pianos.

All of these are probably less successful than the various ways of using resonances within a piano. After all, that has always been available, and the most important pedal on the piano, the damper pedal, relies on them.

My credentials in the field are not relative to the general discussions at Piano World. I clearly state my name and location in my signature line.

If you must know, I hold a Master of Science in Acoustical Engineering from Loyola University. I need not defend my statements to you. Your window analogy is flawed for the reasons I have noted. My credentials are not derived by means of Google.

This is a discussion group. My curriculum vitae is not prerequsite to my participation in this forum. My musical credentials also are not necessary for participation in these forums. Those credentials are the intellectual and practical basis for my skill as a performing pianist and do not require posting on a billboard.

When you venture into analogy based on flawed scientific deduction, your misconception should be presented to the forum. I did just that.

First of all Marty, this discussion was originally dealing with peoples thoughts, analogies and theories on a decent subject. You claim I made an analogy with the window pane that was incorrect. I responded that the analogy is not mine, found in countless text books, articles, citations, Wiki ect...

Instead of making a valid explanation of your view, or actually looking to see why exactly this analogy is used by countless experts, you abondon everything by suddenly claiming your expertise puts you beyond all that. You brought in credentials, I didn't.

Like I said, if a truck engine vibrates at a specific rpm, and a window on a nearby home rattles because of it, but then stops when the rpm changes, that is sympathetic resonance. Called an acoustical engineer in Guelph, he also confirms the analogy is correct. He also confirmed that an mechanical vibration that isn't sympathetic (as you claim) will rattle that window through a wide range of frequency. Marty, you are missing this important difference. Non sympathetic vibration will work in a wide frequency range...the analogy mentioned states the opposite.

My credentials in the field are not relative to the general discussions at Piano World. I clearly state my name and location in my signature line.

If you must know, I hold a Master of Science in Acoustical Engineering from Loyola University. I need not defend my statements to you. Your window analogy is flawed for the reasons I have noted. My credentials are not derived by means of Google.

This is a discussion group. My curriculum vitae is not prerequsite to my participation in this forum. My musical credentials also are not necessary for participation in these forums. Those credentials are the intellectual and practical basis for my skill as a performing pianist and do not require posting on a billboard.

When you venture into analogy based on flawed scientific deduction, your misconception should be presented to the forum. I did just that.

First of all Marty, this discussion was originally dealing with peoples thoughts, analogies and theories on a decent subject. You claim I made an analogy with the window pane that was incorrect. I responded that the analogy is not mine, found in countless text books, articles, citations, Wiki ect...

Instead of making a valid explanation of your view, or actually looking to see why exactly this analogy is used by countless experts, you abondon everything by suddenly claiming your expertise puts you beyond all that. You brought in credentials, I didn't.

Like I said, if a truck engine vibrates at a specific rpm, and a window on a nearby home rattles because of it, but then stops when the rpm changes, that is sympathetic resonance. Called an acoustical engineer in Guelph, he also confirms the analogy is correct. He also confirmed that an mechanical vibration that isn't sympathetic (as you claim) will rattle that window through a wide range of frequency. Marty, you are missing this important difference. Non sympathetic vibration will work in a wide frequency range...the analogy mentioned states the opposite.

I am missing nothing. If you really called one of my colleagues (unnamed), you obviously did not quote your own analogy exactly as written. Your analogy is incorrect and I have pointed out exactly why. You are now tempering it in an attempt to prove it true. Many of the things you have stated, are defending a premiss which is not the original.

I was the one who brought up credentials?

Originally Posted By: Emmery

Your own "expertise" however appears self proclaimed, and not important enough to even put in your signature.

If the truck changes gears, the window will still rattle. I does not negate the mechanical vibration being transmitted to the window frame. The intensity of the rattle may change or even stop. It has nothing to do with sympathetic vibration. There may, in fact, be minor resonance between the glass and the truck, but it is mechanical vibration, not sympathetic vibration, causing the glass to rattle.

You are wrong. You need not attempt to teach what I have already learned through formal education.

If the truck changes gears, the window will still rattle. I does not negate the mechanical vibration being transmitted to the window frame. The intensity of the rattle may change or even stop. It has nothing to do with sympathetic vibration. There may, in fact, be minor resonance between the glass and the truck, but it is mechanical vibration, not sympathetic vibration, causing the glass to rattle.

A loose window in a pane is a highly nonlinear system and the usual concepts of resonance don't quite apply. Rattling can occur at pretty much any frequency, but only if the excitation force is just right. You basically bounce the glass back and forth between its points of attachments. With a higher force you can make it rattle at a higher frequency.

For linear systems this is not true. The resonance response is directly proportional to how close the excitation frequency is to the natural resonance of the system and is independent of the excitation force.

I guess this shows that piano's are complex nonlinear systems, not easily emulated by digital keyboards.

Long time ago I was woken up in Holland by a rattling window which I assumed was caused by a truck which was not supposed to be allowed to drive through the narrow street I lived in.

It turned out to be caused by a small earthquake caused by gas extraction cave collapse some 100 Km away. It had just the right frequency and force to make it happen.

Stravinsky's Serenade en La uses silently depressed notes to hold certain sounds, as do a number of pieces by other composers. The most notable piece is Ives' Concord Sonata, which calls for a block of wood to hold a cluster of notes. Even Paganini from Carnival by Schumann plays a bunch of loud chords with the pedal, and then plays another chord almost silently, which is held while the pedal is let up. The latter chord is heard without attack.

Which means that what Jerry said is true only 99.9999999999999999999999999% of the time.

How good to go with the flow then ! (I dont trust your number anyway) I just cannot understand how, a piano technician, that is supposed to work for and with musicians, may belive that music may be some basic 3 or 4 chords and simple tunes derived from religious hymns for the main part.

That is so much of a simplified ,reduced point of view on the richness of our world that it escapes me. (I believe it is due to early mind programming)

When looking at it more closely even the origins of those actual standards where richer, rhythmically speaking most often but also from melody point of view.

End of the rant

I just heard yesterday a radio program on Alan Lomax & family , very interesting samples of treasures from the past.

_________________________
It is critical that you call your Senators and Representatives and ask them to cosponsor S. 2587 and H.R. 5052. Getting your legislators to cosponsor these bills

My credentials in the field are not relative to the general discussions at Piano World. I clearly state my name and location in my signature line.

If you must know, I hold a Master of Science in Acoustical Engineering from Loyola University. I need not defend my statements to you. Your window analogy is flawed for the reasons I have noted. My credentials are not derived by means of Google.

This is a discussion group. My curriculum vitae is not prerequsite to my participation in this forum. My musical credentials also are not necessary for participation in these forums. Those credentials are the intellectual and practical basis for my skill as a performing pianist and do not require posting on a billboard.

When you venture into analogy based on flawed scientific deduction, your misconception should be presented to the forum. I did just that.

First of all Marty, this discussion was originally dealing with peoples thoughts, analogies and theories on a decent subject. You claim I made an analogy with the window pane that was incorrect. I responded that the analogy is not mine, found in countless text books, articles, citations, Wiki ect...

Instead of making a valid explanation of your view, or actually looking to see why exactly this analogy is used by countless experts, you abondon everything by suddenly claiming your expertise puts you beyond all that. You brought in credentials, I didn't.

Like I said, if a truck engine vibrates at a specific rpm, and a window on a nearby home rattles because of it, but then stops when the rpm changes, that is sympathetic resonance. Called an acoustical engineer in Guelph, he also confirms the analogy is correct. He also confirmed that an mechanical vibration that isn't sympathetic (as you claim) will rattle that window through a wide range of frequency. Marty, you are missing this important difference. Non sympathetic vibration will work in a wide frequency range...the analogy mentioned states the opposite.

I am missing nothing. If you really called one of my colleagues (unnamed), you obviously did not quote your own analogy exactly as written. Your analogy is incorrect and I have pointed out exactly why. You are now tempering it in an attempt to prove it true. Many of the things you have stated, are defending a premiss which is not the original.

I was the one who brought up credentials?

Originally Posted By: Emmery

Your own "expertise" however appears self proclaimed, and not important enough to even put in your signature.

If the truck changes gears, the window will still rattle. I does not negate the mechanical vibration being transmitted to the window frame. The intensity of the rattle may change or even stop. It has nothing to do with sympathetic vibration. There may, in fact, be minor resonance between the glass and the truck, but it is mechanical vibration, not sympathetic vibration, causing the glass to rattle.

You are wrong. You need not attempt to teach what I have already learned through formal education.

My credentials in the field are not relative to the general discussions at Piano World. I clearly state my name and location in my signature line.

If you must know, I hold a Master of Science in Acoustical Engineering from Loyola University. I need not defend my statements to you. Your window analogy is flawed for the reasons I have noted. My credentials are not derived by means of Google.

This is a discussion group. My curriculum vitae is not prerequsite to my participation in this forum. My musical credentials also are not necessary for participation in these forums. Those credentials are the intellectual and practical basis for my skill as a performing pianist and do not require posting on a billboard.

When you venture into analogy based on flawed scientific deduction, your misconception should be presented to the forum. I did just that.

First of all Marty, this discussion was originally dealing with peoples thoughts, analogies and theories on a decent subject. You claim I made an analogy with the window pane that was incorrect. I responded that the analogy is not mine, found in countless text books, articles, citations, Wiki ect...

Instead of making a valid explanation of your view, or actually looking to see why exactly this analogy is used by countless experts, you abondon everything by suddenly claiming your expertise puts you beyond all that. You brought in credentials, I didn't.

Like I said, if a truck engine vibrates at a specific rpm, and a window on a nearby home rattles because of it, but then stops when the rpm changes, that is sympathetic resonance. Called an acoustical engineer in Guelph, he also confirms the analogy is correct. He also confirmed that an mechanical vibration that isn't sympathetic (as you claim) will rattle that window through a wide range of frequency. Marty, you are missing this important difference. Non sympathetic vibration will work in a wide frequency range...the analogy mentioned states the opposite.

I am missing nothing. If you really called one of my colleagues (unnamed), you obviously did not quote your own analogy exactly as written. Your analogy is incorrect and I have pointed out exactly why. You are now tempering it in an attempt to prove it true. Many of the things you have stated, are defending a premiss which is not the original.

I was the one who brought up credentials?

Originally Posted By: Emmery

Your own "expertise" however appears self proclaimed, and not important enough to even put in your signature.

If the truck changes gears, the window will still rattle. I does not negate the mechanical vibration being transmitted to the window frame. The intensity of the rattle may change or even stop. It has nothing to do with sympathetic vibration. There may, in fact, be minor resonance between the glass and the truck, but it is mechanical vibration, not sympathetic vibration, causing the glass to rattle.

You are wrong. You need not attempt to teach what I have already learned through formal education.

Marty, because the original topic in the posting has to do with resonance, the analogy I copied copied and presented had to do with resonance. Resonance phenomena can occur from mechanical resonance, acoustic resonance, electromagnetic resonance, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), electron spin resonance (ESR) and resonance of quantum wave functions. Sympathetic resonance will occur from mechanical conveyance of the energy along side of non-sympathetic resonance. This is why the rattle can occur at a specific frequency and diminish or dissappear at different frequencies.

The part I put in bold in your quote is incorrect. Mechanical resonance can also be sympathetic. It is a specific frequency where the input mechanical vibration matches the resonant frequency of the object and/or its interface with another object closely and the natural dampening qualities of the object is reduced or negated. IIn the case of a rattle on a window which is not solid in its frame is dependant on the clearance between them. A wide clearance will correspond to a slower frequency, a narrow clearance will respond to a higher frequency. It this case the resonance is based on the interface of the two objects.

On a piano, the wide spectrum frequencies of the hammer blow attack (not the string harmonics) are being mechanically conveyed through the bridge to other strings. If part of that spectrum matches the natural resonant frequencies of another string, these will become more pronounced comparatively. A buzz from a loose rib can also occur at specific frequencies and this too is dependant on the fit between them.

Kees, I've heard linguolabial trills with more depth and musical quality than what Musica Ricercata has to offer...I'm sad to say. When an artist gathers enough recognition to put out trash or nothing as an example of their work...the only thing more silly are the critics who waste their breath talking about it.

Its in the same league as Cages' 4' 33" (opening and closing the piano lid)....